Clinical Efficacy of Vibrating Mesh and Jet Nebulizers With Different Interfaces in Pediatric Subjects With Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Nebulizers are commonly used in emergency departments to deliver bronchodilators to children with asthma exacerbations. However, no clinical study comparing a vibrating mesh nebulizer with a jet nebulizer is available in this patient population. The purpose of this study was to compare t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Respiratory Care Vol. 65; no. 10; pp. 1451 - 1464
Autores principales: Moody, Gerald B., Luckett, Peter M., Shockley, Courtney M., Huang, Rong, Ari, Arzu
Formato: algorithm CEU research tables/charts randomized controlled trial Journal Article
Publicado: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Oct2020
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=146059452&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 146059452
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00201324
        4GG
      jtl: Respiratory Care
      issn: 00201324
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2020
      vid: 65
      iid: 10
      pid: 1365
      pub: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
      place: New Rochelle, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        146059452
        146059452
        146059452
        10.4187/respcare.07538
        146059452
      ppf: 1451
      ppct: 13
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Clinical Efficacy of Vibrating Mesh and Jet Nebulizers With Different Interfaces in Pediatric Subjects With Asthma.
      aug:
        au:
          Moody, Gerald B.
          Luckett, Peter M.
          Shockley, Courtney M.
          Huang, Rong
          Ari, Arzu
        affil: Department of Respiratory Care, Children's Health -- Children's Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
      sug:
        subj:
          Nebulizers and Vaporizers
          Asthma Therapy
          Masks
          Emergency Service
          Child
          Single-Blind Studies
          Randomized Controlled Trials
          Adolescence
          Child, Preschool
          Disease Exacerbation
          Multiple Logistic Regression
          Descriptive Statistics
          Academic Medical Centers
          Sample Size
          Chi Square Test
          Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test
          Data Analysis Software
          Education, Continuing (Credit)
          Human
          Child: 6-12 years
          Adolescent: 13-18 years
          Child, Preschool: 2-5 years
      ab: BACKGROUND: Nebulizers are commonly used in emergency departments to deliver bronchodilators to children with asthma exacerbations. However, no clinical study comparing a vibrating mesh nebulizer with a jet nebulizer is available in this patient population. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of a vibrating mesh nebulizer to a jet nebulizer combined with a mouthpiece or mask in children with asthma exacerbations admitted to the emergency department. METHODS: We conducted a single-blinded randomized clinical trial of 217 children (2-18 y old) with a moderate to severe asthma exacerbation in the emergency department. Assessment of severity was defined by our acute asthma score, adapted from the Pediatric Asthma Score. Subjects were randomized to receive bronchodilator treatment via vibrating mesh nebulizer (n = 108) or jet nebulizer (n = 109) and were treated until they achieved a mild asthma score and were discharged or until a decision to admit was made. All subjects were treated per our acute asthma clinical pathway algorithm for the emergency department with modifications to allow for blinding, assessment of treatment, and data collection. Outcome variables included hospital admission rate, number of treatments, and time to mild asthma score. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in baseline asthma score between subjects treated with the vibrating mesh nebulizer and those treated with the jet nebulizer (P = .042), but no other significant differences in demographics existed between groups. To adjust for effect of baseline asthma score, a multiple logistic regression model was used to model admission. The vibrating mesh nebulizer group had a lower probability of being admitted to the hospital (P = .062), and they required significantly fewer treatments (P < .001) and less time to reach a mild asthma score (P = .004) than those in the jet nebulizer group. In subjects with a mask interface, the vibrating mesh nebulizer significantly reduced the probability of admission (P = .032). CONCLUSIONS: Subjects treated with a vibrating mesh nebulizer required significantly fewer treatments and less time to achieve a mild asthma score. In subjects with a mask interface, the vibrating mesh nebulizer significantly reduced the probability of admission compared to jet nebulizer.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        algorithm
        CEU
        research
        tables/charts
        randomized controlled trial
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N